Motricidade © Edições Desafio Singular

2016, vol. 12, n. 3, pp. 2-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.6063/motricidade.8621

Humanities in the field of Human Motricity

Rodolfo Franco Puttini1*, Leandro Dri Manfiolete1, Jorge Ándrés Jimenez Muñoz1,2, Claudio
Silvério da Silva1, Camilla Lie Higa1,3, Rodrigo Martins Bersi4, André Borges Fernandes
Guimarães1
LETTER TO THE EDITOR

We believe that the creation of an editorial
section reserved exclusively for the production of
theoretical essays and philosophical reflections
on the subject motricity ("Human Kinetics" or
"Science of Motricity"), will bring to the scientific
community the cultural capital accumulation in
the field of production knowledge of Physical
Education. This request to the Journal
Motricidade is justified for many reasons, among
which we defend as a central argument, the
opening to an interdisciplinary discussion space.
First, understand interdisciplinary studies
following the current Brazilian scientific
classification of CAPES (Coordination of
Improvement of Higher Education Research),
which allows traffic from three colleges, which
add large areas of knowledge (Life Sciences,
Exact Sciences and Humanities).
Second, in a quick scan in three hundred
sixty-three scientific publications journal
between the years 2005-2015 demonstrated the
number of fifteen articles that approach the
philosophical concerns in the field of Physical
Education (Alves, Pinto, Alves, Mota, & Leirós,
2009; Araújo, Souza, & Ribas, 2014; Azevedo,
Ferreira, Da Silva, Caminha, & Freitas, 2012;
Bauman & Carvalho, 2005; Drigo, Souza Neto,
Cesana, & Tojal, 2011; Drumond, 2006; Garcia,
2008; Moreira & Pestana, 2008; Ribeiro &
Tavares, 2011; Rodrigues, 2005, 2008; Schwartz,
Figueiredo, Pereira, Christofoletti, & Dias, 2013;
Sérgio, 2005, 2006).
This indicates that, in the scientific
community, writers and readers of this journal
give little value to the spread of the knowledge
on the human motricity theory, focusing on the
social and cultural aspects that no longer are
intertwined the Physical Education studies. But
we as readers and authors, we believe that this
category of theoretical essays is essential to the
comprehension of the scientific field of Physical
Education. Our reference of the scientific field
includes, more than a panel to spread the results
of empiric research, the place of dispute and
theoretical assumptions (Bourdieu, 1989).
For example, two essays from Manuel Sergio
published in the scientific magazine represent
the perplexity of the field of human motricity.
Due to the proposition of this Portuguese
thinker, the development of an “epistemology of
the human motricity” (Sérgio, 1987), we ask:
What are the constituent elements of motricity
that configure it as a human dimension? What
philosophical fundamentals of different sciences
and disciplines serve as theoretical and
integrating the motricity?
We agree that there are paradigms activing in
Physical Education, in addition to Manuel Sergio
proposal. But we just want to point out its
theoretical influence in Latin American countries
for the following lines of research: the human
dimension of Benjumea (2010) and gives body
practice in Gallo (2010), both Colombia; the
proposed body education in Crisório and Lescano
(2015) in Argentine; of the didactics of the

Letter Submitted February 24th 2016; Accepted May 27th 2016

1
Department of Public Health, Botucatu Medical School of State University of São Paulo "Júlio de Mesquita Filho",
UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Pontifícia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colômbia
3
Centro Universitário Salesiano, Lins, São Paulo, Brazil
4
State University of North Paraná, UENP, Brazil
Autor correspondente: Departamento de Saúde Pública da Faculdade de Medicina, Campus Botucatu, Av. Prof.
Montenegro, s/n - Distrito de Rubião Júnior, Botucatu - SP, 18618-687, Brasil. E-mail: puttini@fmb.unesp.br

teaching practice in Arévalo (2005) in Chile; and
Brazil's proposals on the relationship between
education and experience in different contexts in
Gonçalves Junior, Corrêa, and Rodrigues (2011);
the production of knowledge in professional
intervention and formation based on the
humanities in Hunger, Correa, Rossi, and Betti
(2015); the critical perspective to the body of
knowledge produced in relation to body culture
movement in Betti (2003) and Bracht (1999).
And, in addition to the theory of human
motricity, we remind Praxiology Motriz in Pierre
Parlebas (2001), whose philosophical model
research applied to the French school structure.
And finally, we see new possibilities of
Philosophy of Science assist in research strategies
in the scientific field of Physical Education
(Lacey, 2010). Certainly there are many other
models for Physical Education of varied hues that
we would like to know and share with our
students and researchers.
These are the questions that summarize our
initial concerns. It tends to privilege aspects
philosophical, historical, social and political
human movement. It is true that we recognize
the inherent importance of the biomedical model
for studies and research in the field of motricity
and that this research strategy prevails in the
Journal Motricidade. But also hold that the
concept of life, originating in the Humanities,
you can and should live in the scientific field.
We have strong arguments to justify our
proposal of creating an editorial section
philosophic this journal. Historically, hegemonic
discourse in the field of Physical Education
comes from the conceptualization biomedical
Life Sciences, giving hygienists, eugenicists and
psychiatrists’ postures and influencing planning
curriculum vocational training directed only for
understanding biological the human body. There
too much influence in communication practices
of scientific knowledge, whose approaches
methodological prevail the disclosures
quantitative data in magazines and participation
in congresses.
We suggest that situation counteracts the
absence ethical assessments in scientific
tradition Physical Education. In contrast, we have
followed the perspective philosophical values in
Letter to the Editor | 3
scientific activity in Hugh Lacey (2015), working
out the critical tradition of modern science
starting from the ideal of neutrality:
"I can never to arrive being neutral. None
person individual can. Each person acts and
think in the light a perspective on the world,
reflecting a context socio-historical, culture, life
experience, anticipations future possibilities,
ontological beliefs and cosmic and specific
values. What is known, and which are
potentially items of knowledge, depends
outlook of the world sustained by several
people. There is no action, thought or
knowledge without perspective. The Descartes
project to discover (or generate) a foundation
rational knowledge, valid and compulsory for
all, without perspective and without entering
specific values, It is and will remain It is just a
dream; however, a recurring dream for
participants tradition of modern science.
Perhaps this Cartesian dream arose deep
unconsciousness shared modernity; and
certainly such a dream I was linked the modern
idea that strengthening human well-being
increase depends on the human capacity to
exercise control about natural objects. Or yet
has been an allegory that works to mask that
that reasoning, supposedly rational and neutral,
really is the perspective people representative’s
dominant social interests. Anyway, Cartesian
dream It tends to become closely connected
with reality; exercised, and continues to
exercise, a powerful influence on the modern
consciousness, and nourish an illusory notion
the neutrality of science.” (Lacey, 2014, p. 61).
Our positioning regarding the ideal scientific
neutrality, inside of our academic obligations,
brings the debate on responsibility researchers in
Life Sciences and Health Sciences. For example,
discussions on professional procedures involving
conflicts of values with human life they can be
ordered by historical evidence. We supported
this prerogative on the knowledge of life in
Canguilhem (2012) and the gray medical history,
attested by Martins (2012):
"Faced with iatrogenic trends and eugenic
planning scientific policies, criticism of
Herminio Martins thickens the history of
medicine with organic aspects systematic
medical practice and unprincipled biomedical
4 | RF Puttini, L Manfiolete, JÁJ Muñoz, CS da Silva, CL Higa, RM Bersi, ABF Guimarães
testing with bodies of human beings dated the
barbarities scientific war human experiments
biomedicine in Manchuria, Korea and China as
a detour of knowledge of life fomented State
tanatocrático." (Puttini, 2015 p.455-6)
Like this, we understand that ethics it is the
core which ensures equity in debate between
knowledge and human life. Corroborating these
values for the scientific field, we asked: as has
been circulating commitments with the issues on
ethics and responsibility in scientific practice of
human motricity?
We agreed to include these concerns the field
of health. We understand that the concept of
health is included in a field of philosophical
knowledge upon which allows, an
interdisciplinary approach, dialogue with several
scientific areas involving human and your body.
Health in these terms beyond the neutral sense
focused only dick human body, subjacent to
control medical practice.
In this sense, on biomedical hegemony in
pedagogical practice on human movement, the
field of meaning presupposes the enhanced sense
of health, we included in which chances
interdisciplinary dialogue between the
Humanities and the Life Sciences. Now the
Humanities they are so large that the interacting
with Physical Education (found in area Health
Sciences inside from school of knowledge Life
Sciences) it is becomes the main interlocutor and
mediator. In these terms, Philosophy, Sociology,
Psychology, Anthropology, Politics, Geography
and Applied Social Sciences (Demography,
Economy, Administration and Management) are
areas of knowledge that can aggregate the
philosophy of human movement or philosophy of
physical education.
We wish collaborate with the construction
this space ethical and cognitive exposing our
dialogues and reflections philosophical for
human motricity.
Acknowledgements:
To the Provost for Graduate Studies and the Provost
for Research Activities at UNESP;
Coordination for the Improvement of Higher
Education Personnel (CAPES) for the Master's
scholarship to Leandro Dri Manfiolete;
To the Graduate Program in Motricity Science of the
Biosciences Institute, UNESP – Univ Estadual
Paulista, Rio Claro Campus.
Conflict of interest:
Nothing to declare
Funding:
UNESP Call no. 06/2016 “Programa de
Internacionalização da UNESP PROINTER – PROPe /
PROPG.”
REFERÊNCIAS
Alves, D., Pinto, M., Alves, S., Mota, A., & Leirós, V.
(2009). Cultura e imagem corporal. Motricidade,
5(1), 1-20.
Araújo, P. A., Souza, M. S., & Ribas, J. F. M. (2014).
Praxiologia motriz e a abordagem crítico-
superadora: Aproximações preliminares.
Motricidade, 10(4), 3-15.
Arévalo, S. T. (2005). Una Aproximación
Epistemológica a la Didáctica de la Motricidad
desde el Discurso y Práctica Docente
(Dissertação de Doutoramento em Ciências de la
Educacíon). Facultad de Educacíon. Pontificia
Universidad Católica de Chile.
Azevedo, A. P., Ferreira, A. C., Da Silva, P. P.,
Caminha, I. O., & Freitas, C. M. (2012).
Dismorfia muscular: A busca pelo corpo hiper-
musculoso. Motricidade, 8(1), 53-66.
Barbosa, E. G. P., Pontes, V. S., & Ribeiro, C. H. V.
(2015). Revelações dos fotógrafos esportivos
brasileiros sobre relações de gênero. Motricidade,
11(1), 126-134.
Bauman, C. D., & Carvalho, J. C. (2005). Técnica e
expressividade: análise fenomenológica do corpo
na dança. Motricidade, 1(1), 1-8.
Benjumea, M. P. (2010). La Motricidad como
Dimensión Humana. Un Abordaje
Transdisciplinar. Alcalá de Henares: Léeme
Libros.
Betti, M. (2003). Educação Física Escolar: do Idealismo
à Pesquisa-ação (Livre-Docência em Métodos e
Técnicas de Pesquisa em Educação Física e
Motricidade Humana). Faculdade de Ciências de
Bauru, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de
Mesquita Filho” (Unesp).
Bourdieu, P. (1989). O Poder Simbólico. Lisboa: Ed.
DIFEL.
Bracht, V. (1999). Educação física & Ciência: Cenas de
um Casamento (in)feliz. Ijuí: Ed. Unijuí.
Canguilhem, G. (2012). O Conhecimento da Vida. Rio
de Janeiro: Ed. Forense Universitária.

Crisório, R. R., & Lescano, E. L. (2015). Ideas para
pensar la educación del cuerpo. La Plata: Ed. de
la Universidad de la Plata.
Drigo, A. J., Souza Neto, S., Cesana, J., & Tojal, J. B. A.
G. (2011). Artes marciais, formação profissional
e escolas de ofício: Análise documental do judô
brasileiro. Motricidade, 7(4), 49-62.
Drumond, J. G. (2006). Os valores morais de uma
profissão. Motricidade, 2(3), 192-200.
Gallo, L. E. C. (2010). Los Discursos de la Educación
Física Contemporânea. Armênia: Ed. Kinesis.
Garcia, A. B. (2008). Educadores físicos do consumo?
Motricidade, 4(2), 89-93.
Gonçalves Junior, L., Corrêa, D. A., & Rodrigues, C.
(2011). Educação e Experiência: Construindo
Saberes em Diferentes Contextos. Curitiba: Ed.
CRV.
Hunger, D., Correa, E., Rossi, F., & Betti, M. (2015).
Formação e Intervenção Professional em
Educação Física: Olhares e Contribuições das
Ciências Humanas. São Paulo: Ed. Cultura
Acadêmica (Unesp).
Lacey, H. (2010). Valores e Atividade Científica 2. São
Paulo: Associação Filosófica ‘Scientiae Studia’/
Editora 34.
Lacey, H. (2014). Neutralidade como uma Aspiração
para a Ciência Contemporânea. In: L. M. B.
Albuquerque & R. F. e Puttini (Eds.), Questões
sobre a ética e a inocência do método (1ª ed., pp.
61-82). São Paulo: Ed. Annablume/Fapesp.
Martins, H. (2012). Experimentum humanum:
civilização tecnológica e condição humana. Belo
Horizonte: Ed. Fino Traço.
All content of Journal Motricidade is licensed under Creative Commons, except when
otherwise specified and in content retrieved from other bibliographic sources .
Letter to the Editor | 5
Moreira, C. M., & Pestana, G. D. (2008). Algumas
reflexões sobre a ética desportiva. Motricidade,
4(3), 95-101.
Parlebas, P. (2001). Juegos, Deporte y Sociedad. Léxico
de Praxiología Motriz. Barcelona: Ed. Paidotribo.
Puttini, R. F. (2008). Faith healing and the field of
healthcare in Brazil. Interface - Comunicação,
Saúde, Educação, 12(24), 87–106.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-
32832008000100008
Puttini, R. F. (2015). Ética, conhecimento e vida.
Scientiae Studia, 13(2), 449–458.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-
31662015000200011
Ribeiro, P. R. L., & Tavares, M. C. F. (2011). As
contribuições de Seymour Fisher para os estudos
em imagem corporal. Motricidade, 7(4), 83-95.
Rodrigues, R. (2005). A disputa da verdade sobre o
corpo entre as ciências? Será que podemos
estudar as "coisas do corpo" rompendo com a
disputa da "verdade" entre ciências biológicas e
humanas? Motricidade, 1(3), 213-218.
Rodrigues, R. (2008). O esporte é uma prática de bem-
estar ilusório no sujeito? Motricidade, 4(2), 85-7.
Schwartz, G. M., Figueiredo, J. P., Pereira, L. M.,
Christofoletti, D. A., & Dias, V. K. (2013).
Preconceito e esportes de aventura: A (não)
presença feminina. Motricidade, 9(1), 57-68.
Sérgio, M. (1987). Para uma Epistemologia da
Motricidade Humana. Lisboa: Ed. Compendium.
Sérgio, M. (2005). Motricidade Humana - qual o
futuro? Motricidade, 1(4), 271-283.
Sérgio, M. (2006). A Educação Desportiva.
Motricidade, 2(2), 117-122.